And thank's a lot for this release. I was finally able to compile QtD almost
without patching dmd (only patch from#3600). Getting rid of the forward
reference bugs is a big milestone. We just have to make sure that there won't
be regressions. Somebody mentioned a while ago about a service, that would
build big D projects with the newest compiler version to avoid regressions.
This idea I believe is worth discussing.

And thank's a lot for this release. I was finally able to compile QtD almost
without patching dmd (only patch from#3600). Getting rid of the forward
reference bugs is a big milestone. We just have to make sure that there won't
be regressions. Somebody mentioned a while ago about a service, that would
build big D projects with the newest compiler version to avoid regressions.
This idea I believe is worth discussing.

I was wrong, there is still a forward reference bug in dmd, which I cannot
reduce to a testcase, considering the size of the library.

And thank's a lot for this release. I was finally able to compile QtD
almost without patching dmd (only patch from#3600). Getting rid of the
forward reference bugs is a big milestone. We just have to make sure
that there won't be regressions. Somebody mentioned a while ago about a
service, that would build big D projects with the newest compiler
version to avoid regressions. This idea I believe is worth discussing.

I was wrong, there is still a forward reference bug in dmd, which I
cannot reduce to a testcase, considering the size of the library.

And thank's a lot for this release. I was finally able to compile QtD
almost without patching dmd (only patch from#3600). Getting rid of the
forward reference bugs is a big milestone. We just have to make sure
that there won't be regressions. Somebody mentioned a while ago about a
service, that would build big D projects with the newest compiler
version to avoid regressions. This idea I believe is worth discussing.

I was wrong, there is still a forward reference bug in dmd, which I
cannot reduce to a testcase, considering the size of the library.

WoW! I wonder why that patch is not already in DMD, since Don said that it
passes the DMD test suite, and not only fixes 102, it also fixes 461,
2386, 2654 and 2666, not counting a couple of already fixed bugs. I think
Rainer Schuetze deserves a lot of credit, I think his practically at the
same scale as Don fixing important bugs, I hope Walter realizes that and
had him the DMD test suite as well (or even better, releases the test
suite ;).
Thanks for the quick release fixing the regressions!
--
Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca) http://llucax.com.ar/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145 104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you.

And thank's a lot for this release. I was finally able to compile
QtD almost without patching dmd (only patch from#3600). Getting rid
of the forward reference bugs is a big milestone. We just have to
make sure that there won't be regressions. Somebody mentioned a
while ago about a service, that would build big D projects with the
newest compiler version to avoid regressions. This idea I believe is
worth discussing.

I was wrong, there is still a forward reference bug in dmd, which I
cannot reduce to a testcase, considering the size of the library.

WoW! I wonder why that patch is not already in DMD, since Don said that
it passes the DMD test suite, and not only fixes 102, it also fixes 461,
2386, 2654 and 2666, not counting a couple of already fixed bugs. I
think Rainer Schuetze deserves a lot of credit, I think his practically
at the same scale as Don fixing important bugs, I hope Walter realizes
that and had him the DMD test suite as well (or even better, releases
the test suite ;).
Thanks for the quick release fixing the regressions!

And thank's a lot for this release. I was finally able to compile QtD
almost without patching dmd (only patch from#3600). Getting rid of the
forward reference bugs is a big milestone. We just have to make sure
that there won't be regressions. Somebody mentioned a while ago about a
service, that would build big D projects with the newest compiler
version to avoid regressions. This idea I believe is worth discussing.

I was wrong, there is still a forward reference bug in dmd, which I
cannot reduce to a testcase, considering the size of the library.

This patch is no longer relevant. Here is the patch
http://pastebin.com/m1bed188d that fixes compiling QtD with the current dmd (I
also have to apply a patch from #3600). However I cannot really file a bug as I
cannot reduce it to a testcase of a reasonable size. Any chance that this patch
can be applied? Shall I submit it to the bugzilla then?

This patch is no longer relevant. Here is the patch
http://pastebin.com/m1bed188d that fixes compiling QtD with the
current dmd (I also have to apply a patch from #3600). However I
cannot really file a bug as I cannot reduce it to a testcase of a
reasonable size. Any chance that this patch can be applied? Shall I
submit it to the bugzilla then?

You should still submit it to bugzilla, because often someone else is
able to cut them down to size.

I put out a beta to the people who have asked to be on the beta
announcement list, and nobody (other than Don) gave any feedback on it.
If you want to be on the beta list, please email me.
Or on second thought, perhaps I'll ask Brad to set up a beta mailing list.

I put out a beta to the people who have asked to be on the beta
announcement list, and nobody (other than Don) gave any feedback on it.
If you want to be on the beta list, please email me.
Or on second thought, perhaps I'll ask Brad to set up a beta mailing list.

I put out a beta to the people who have asked to be on the beta
announcement list, and nobody (other than Don) gave any feedback on it.
If you want to be on the beta list, please email me.
Or on second thought, perhaps I'll ask Brad to set up a beta mailing list.

Why not just post them publicly on the announce newsgroup?

Agree.
Please, Walter, post betas in Announce newsgroup (here). I'll test Tango trunk,
miniD, xf and my code at least on Windows and Mac 10.5 at work (i'm using
64-bit linux distro, so - ldc there)
Giving beta testers a couple of days before releasing final version will be
perfect.

I'd rather it be a self-selected list of people who decide they need to
be notified, rather than expecting them to constantly check the announce
n.g. I'd also rather not confuse releases with betas, I doubt many would
be interested in betas other than library maintainers.

I'd rather it be a self-selected list of people who decide they need to
be notified, rather than expecting them to constantly check the announce
n.g. I'd also rather not confuse releases with betas, I doubt many would
be interested in betas other than library maintainers.

I'd rather it be a self-selected list of people who decide they need to
be notified, rather than expecting them to constantly check the announce
n.g. I'd also rather not confuse releases with betas, I doubt many would
be interested in betas other than library maintainers.

Please put me on the list.

When Brad creates it, I (or Brad) will post an announcement here, and
you'll be able to sign up for it.

I'd rather it be a self-selected list of people who decide they need to
be notified, rather than expecting them to constantly check the announce
n.g. I'd also rather not confuse releases with betas, I doubt many would
be interested in betas other than library maintainers.

Please put me on the list.

When Brad creates it, I (or Brad) will post an announcement here,
and you'll be able to sign up for it.

Please, do it in the announcement NG, there is no point to have
a separated list. Mark the announcements clearly as beta, with, for
example, a [BETA] prefix. That should be enough to avoid confusion.
--
Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca) http://llucax.com.ar/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145 104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
now self-employed, concerned (but powerless),
an empowered and informed member of society (pragmatism not idealism),
will not cry in public, less chance of illness,
tires that grip in the wet (shot of baby strapped in back seat),

I'd rather it be a self-selected list of people who decide they need
to be notified, rather than expecting them to constantly check the
announce n.g. I'd also rather not confuse releases with betas, I
doubt many would be interested in betas other than library
maintainers.

Why don't you do both? I would like to know when DMD is about to be
released and I don't maintain any libraries (I'm trying to merge latest
DMD FE to LDC though). I don't want to receive any personal e-mails, the
announcement NG is perfect for me.
Please, please, do both if you think is very important for some other
people to be explicitly notified via personal e-mails.
Thanks.
--
Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca) http://llucax.com.ar/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145 104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lo último que hay que pensar es que se desalinea la memoria
Hay que priorizar como causa la idiotez propia
Ya lo tengo asumido
-- Pablete, filósofo contemporáneo desconocido

I put out a beta to the people who have asked to be on the beta
announcement list, and nobody (other than Don) gave any feedback on
it. If you want to be on the beta list, please email me.
Or on second thought, perhaps I'll ask Brad to set up a beta mailing
list.

If you do, please add a link to it to the D front page. (I might be interested
later but not now)

And thank's a lot for this release. I was finally able to compile QtD
almost without patching dmd (only patch from#3600). Getting rid of the
forward reference bugs is a big milestone. We just have to make sure
that there won't be regressions. Somebody mentioned a while ago about a
service, that would build big D projects with the newest compiler
version to avoid regressions. This idea I believe is worth discussing.

I was wrong, there is still a forward reference bug in dmd, which I
cannot reduce to a testcase, considering the size of the library.

WoW! I wonder why that patch is not already in DMD, since Don said that it
passes the DMD test suite, and not only fixes 102, it also fixes 461,
2386, 2654 and 2666, not counting a couple of already fixed bugs. I think
Rainer Schuetze deserves a lot of credit, I think his practically at the
same scale as Don fixing important bugs, I hope Walter realizes that and
had him the DMD test suite as well (or even better, releases the test
suite ;).
Thanks for the quick release fixing the regressions!
--
Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca) http://llucax.com.ar/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145 104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you.

I am all for it. The patch I have just posted in this thread is also by Rainer.
He has done a significant amount of work to make dmd compile QtD.

I put out a beta to the people who have asked to be on the beta
announcement list, and nobody (other than Don) gave any feedback on it.
If you want to be on the beta list, please email me.
Or on second thought, perhaps I'll ask Brad to set up a beta mailing list.

This patch is no longer relevant. Here is the patch
http://pastebin.com/m1bed188d that fixes compiling QtD with the
current dmd (I also have to apply a patch from #3600). However I
cannot really file a bug as I cannot reduce it to a testcase of a
reasonable size. Any chance that this patch can be applied? Shall I
submit it to the bugzilla then?

You should still submit it to bugzilla, because often someone else is
able to cut them down to size.

There is only 2 of us working on QtD and there has not been interest from
anyone to help with it. QtD contains more than 500 auto generated
classes/modules with tons of methods and inter-dependencies. It's not easy at
all. Consider it as an example of real word application with a million lines of
code. If not Rainer's tremendous help, I would have given up with the
development of QtD a while ago. He was only able to help me because he used QtD
as a stress test.
This patch is also made by Rainer and apparently it is no longer valid (it was
applicable to dmd svn revision 323, but not 324 anymore). All I can do is to
rely on Rainer again.

This patch is no longer relevant. Here is the patch
http://pastebin.com/m1bed188d that fixes compiling QtD with the
current dmd (I also have to apply a patch from #3600). However I
cannot really file a bug as I cannot reduce it to a testcase of a
reasonable size. Any chance that this patch can be applied? Shall I
submit it to the bugzilla then?

You should still submit it to bugzilla, because often someone else is
able to cut them down to size.

There is only 2 of us working on QtD and there has not been interest from
anyone to help with it. QtD contains more than 500 auto generated
classes/modules with tons of methods and inter-dependencies. It's not easy at
all. Consider it as an example of real word application with a million lines of
code. If not Rainer's tremendous help, I would have given up with the
development of QtD a while ago. He was only able to help me because he used QtD
as a stress test.
This patch is also made by Rainer and apparently it is no longer valid (it was
applicable to dmd svn revision 323, but not 324 anymore). All I can do is to
rely on Rainer again.

I.e. it is valid, it just no longer fixes #2511 as it used to do. It would be
nice at least to get this one fixed, as it is a blocker for us too.

This patch is no longer relevant. Here is the patch
http://pastebin.com/m1bed188d that fixes compiling QtD with the
current dmd (I also have to apply a patch from #3600). However I
cannot really file a bug as I cannot reduce it to a testcase of a
reasonable size. Any chance that this patch can be applied?
Shall I submit it to the bugzilla then?

You should still submit it to bugzilla, because often someone else
is able to cut them down to size.

There is only 2 of us working on QtD and there has not been interest
from anyone to help with it.

Interest from people waxes and wanes, I wouldn't be concerned if it was
wane at the moment. The advantage to Bugzilla is it sits there, sails
up, ready for when the wind blows. The n.g., however, is very topical,
and old news scrolls away and out of sight.

QtD contains more than 500 auto
generated classes/modules with tons of methods and
inter-dependencies. It's not easy at all. Consider it as an example
of real word application with a million lines of code. If not
Rainer's tremendous help, I would have given up with the development
of QtD a while ago. He was only able to help me because he used QtD
as a stress test.

You and Rainer have been very valuable contributors to the quality of D.

This patch is also made by Rainer and apparently it is no longer
valid (it was applicable to dmd svn revision 323, but not 324
anymore). All I can do is to rely on Rainer again.